Council house sales and leaseholders

Recent statements in this category are shown below:

Summary: Mrs X complained that after a data breach, the Council refused to waive the repayable discount on her property which she bought under the Right to Buy scheme. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

Summary: Mr and Mrs X complain the Council unreasonably delayed the completion of their 'right to buy' application. There was fault by the Council that warrants a remedy to reflect the additional time and trouble Mr and Mrs X spent pursuing the application and their complaints.

Summary: Ms X complains about the purchase price offered by the Council under the Right to Buy. The Ombudsman has discontinued our investigation because there is no fault causing injustice to Ms X and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X wants.

Summary: Mr W complains the Council did not tell him about a shared equity scheme. Mr W says as a result he was not able to apply for the scheme and missed out on the opportunity. Mr W also complains the Council has not offered him a replacement property. The Ombudsman finds no evidence of fault with the Council's actions.

Summary: Mr X complains the Council would not start his second Right to Buy process until he had sent them details of his finances. There was fault by the Council in how it dealt with Mr X's first Right to Buy application. It was fault that the Council did not reply to Mr X's queries about the maintenance and service charges for the property. That fault caused Mr X an injustice requiring a remedy. Mr X did not submit a valid second Right to Buy application. It was not fault by the Council which stopped that application progressing.

Summary: The Council misled an applicant for a shared ownership property about how it would set the price. It failed to tell the applicant it had changed the garden and refused a new valuation. The Council withdrew from the sale without good reason. It then did not deal with a complaint about this but sent it to external litigation solicitors and tried to hold the applicant responsible for the costs of this. The Council caused the applicant injustice because he lost the property and had over £3,000 in abortive costs. The Council also caused the complaint significant time, trouble, distress and outrage. The Council will pay the complainant £6,000 and improve how it administers its shared ownership scheme.

Summary: Mr X has complained the Council wrongly led him to believe he could purchase his home under the Right to Buy scheme. He is also unhappy with how the Monitoring Officer dealt with his complaint about a local councillor. There is no evidence of fault by the Council.

Summary: The Council was at fault when it withdrew from the sale of a property under its Newshare scheme without a good reason to do so. This has caused Mr X quantifiable loss, distress and time and trouble. The Council has made an offer to re-sell Mr X the property and pay him £4220 which is a suitable remedy.

Summary: The Ombudsman found no fault on Mr D's complaint about the Council's failure to properly calculate a rent rebate following a 25-month delay in completing the purchase of his house under the right to buy scheme.

Summary: There was no fault by the Council during Miss X's Right to Buy house purchase. It had given her information about the legal remedy available to her but Miss X was unaware of this right until the sale had nearly completed and it was too late to use it.

Some of the cookies are essential for parts of the site to operate and have already been set. To find out more, see our cookies notice.

;

Javascript is not enabled!

It appears that your web browser does not support JavaScript, or you have temporarily disabled scripting. Either way, this site won't work without it. Please take a look at how to enable javascript for more help.